Re: [IndusCrest] Please stay focussed on the task at hand - EC and all

[Phani Vemuri]

Suresh,

While you speak for the Phase 1 members and the spirit of the society, you have to understand that majority of the society is in phase2/withdrawal. You cannot request the spirit to be intact while asking the majority to agree with minority phase 1 members or walk-away. Spirit works in both ways.

If there is no solution for phase2/withdrawal, I don't see how phase1 can be completed. Please note, there is hard-earned money of 400+ members (>Rs 28cr) is at stake here.

I am all for extending the term of the current EC as long as the EC has a dedicated team within EC who focus on phase 2/withdrawal. 

Regards,

Phani

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Kshamata <ksha...@gmail.com> wrote:

Suresh,

You could reiterate as many times you want.

 

Phase 2 Members(400+) including Withdrawal Members are not here for charity or should not be taken for a ride. Its the hard-earned money and not black money.

 

Do you intend to say that we should settle for 40-50% or whatever amount and walk out? That too the reasons best known to you?

 

Having said that now no Phase 2 members would have such humiliating settlements(of 30-40% earlier?) when its a known fact that the Land prices are appreciating in a much faster pace near Seestar site.

 

Request all Phase 2 members to explore all the options and come up with their ideas for Withdrawal Members cause and rest of the Phase 2 as well.

 

Regards,

Kshamata

 

   

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Marisetty's <mariset...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

 

I want to re-ierate one more time.

 

I commend the team of people who saved the society from Manans and Hari.  The team of people who saved consisted of many with different areas of strenghts.  The society should continue with a core EC that has the various strenghts to make it successful.

 

We have come a long way and let us continue the good work.  No matter what, nobody can dispute that and not keep that in perspective.  Please set aside the differences and continue on a constructive path and move forward.

 

I will also say this without any hesitation.  The spirit of the society when it was started is for it to have the 500+ people come together and build a community.  This was the foundation on which everything is built.  Let us not shake that foundation in the name of phase-2 withdrawal rebellion.

 

I will personally not support such rebellion in the interest of the original spirit of the society. I will even go to the extent of saying to those who want to dismantle this foundation - cut your losses and walk out if you don't want to participlate in this spirit.  Withdrawal by selling the land, etc is not in the interest of the society and is not a viable option.  Find interested parties and sell your interests.

 

Agree with others, let us not make this personal, and try to hurt each others creadability by digging out the past.

 

Learn from the past and secure the future.

 

regards

Suresh

--
*** Software Engineer's Employees Housing and Welfare Association (SEEHWA) is a registered non-profit. IndusCrest google group is SEEHWA's IndusCrest Project (http://www.facebook.com/IndusCrest) Announcement-Only Group - All information posted here in is member confidential. Bylaws prohibit members from abusing personal information of other members.***
 
 

--
Best Regards,
Kshamata

--
*** Software Engineer's Employees Housing and Welfare Association (SEEHWA) is a registered non-profit. IndusCrest google group is SEEHWA's IndusCrest Project (http://www.facebook.com/IndusCrest) Announcement-Only Group - All information posted here in is member confidential. Bylaws prohibit members from abusing personal information of other members.***
 
 

[Vamsee Chakka]

Suresh,
It is insensitive to comment about others hard earned money. Since
almost 90% of phase 2 members want their money back, original model
will not work anymore. If I remember right, only about 50-60 new
members joined (replacing withdrawal members, according to one of EC's
email) in 2 years when phase 1 construction is in full swing. If there
is no sufficient quorum for Phase 2 construction, it cannot begin. Why
would any outsider be interested in getting a stake in phase 2 when
there is no timeline? If Phase 2 working committee is exploring
alternatives, by all means they can. Right question to ask them would
be how their proposal would fit in the society model.

Phani,
I don't understand your comment - 'If there is no solution for

phase2/withdrawal, I don't see how phase1 can be

completed'. Can you please care to explain why phase 1 cannot be
completed? Phase 1 members also have a stake of Rs. 120 Cr.

Phase 2 working committee & current EC,
I'm thinking out loud.
In the beginning, scope of the original project was increased when
there was overwhelming response. Is it possible to roll back this in
theory? Split into phase 1 and phase 2 into two different societies,
separate the land. Phase 2 society will decide whats best for their
members. No strip of land issue, no amenities sharing issue.

Vamsee

> --
> SEESTAR2 Group is the Group to discuss how to get our hard earned money
> back. What are the different options we have. We need to look at all the
> options and decide what's best for us. We need to actively involved in the
> taking the right decision
> No one would look after our interest, it s we , the members of phase II who
> have to take the initiative and take the best possible road ahead. Hence
> please do check all mails related to our interest and attend meetings and
> make our presence felt.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "seestar2" group.
> To post to this group, send email to sees...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> seestar2+u...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/seestar2?hl=en-US.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[SeestarPhase2 Phase2]

Vamsee

It may not be as simple as you think in dividing the society into two.
The initial 6 acres (phase 2) was bought with contributions from about
300 members and the later 5 acres (phase 1) was bought with
contributions from say another 300 members and 15 villa members. But
the share of land in phase 1 is given only to 240 members which in the
first place is not proper.

If you want to divide the society, it may not be straight forward.
Some of the original 300 members went into Phase 1 and some of the
later 300 members are in Phase 2 now.

We will have this problem for ever until we pass a resolution in a
AGBM that all members are OK with this arrangement. How can a member
who has a share of land in the 5 acres now lay his/her claim on the 6
acres land.

This was not done till today. This is another reason for having open
elections to all the positions, be legal in whatever we do.

Finally, give it a thinking. Can the interim EC who has violated
byelaws by continuing their term without the approval of the general
body sign documents for registration and if so the registration will
be valid at all in the future. We are not sure but Phase 1 members
need to give this a strong thought.

We advise you to read the byelaws and see if our interim EC has
followed it. It should take no more than 30mins.

phase 2 working committee member

[Vamsee Chakka]

Nothing comes easy in life.

I'm not sure, may be it is easier than you think, because what we own
is 'Undivided land share', no member was given in writing that he/she
owns land share in first bought or second bought land.

From comparing to Jay's email, you grossly misstated numbers used for
Phase 1 in your first paragraph. Quote from Jay's email:
i) Phase I - 3.36 acre
II) Remaining : - 6 acre
iii) Villa owners:- 1.5 acre (however, we lost some of the land due
to a straightening of the compound wall - done by older ex-management)

If I need to compare the ratio of apts/acre, Phase 1 has planned
71.427 apts/acre (240/3.36) where as phase 2 has planned 60 apts/acre
(360/6). Amenities block is also in Phase 1 land which is making it
more crowded. More open land is in Phase 2. Now tell me who got the
raw deal. With a self appointed representation role of working
committee, please use facts.

If united society: Phase 2 members may not need any consensus from
Phase 1 members if phase 2 goes for construction. But if Phase 2 goes
for joint development with a builder, Phase 1 members consensus is
needed to make sure that current ratio of planned 60 apts/acre (or a
total 360 apts in phase 2 land), amenities construction cost and
corpus fund are all considered. Not only amenities block is funded by
phase 1 but also phase 1 members are contributing to corpus fund to
maintain these. Phase 1 members are contributing an average of Rs 2.21
L into the corpus fund (1L per member which makes 2.4Cr, floor
premiums from all the members make 2.91 Cr, together a total of 5.31
Cr). Please dont tell me that Phase 2 joint development option does
not impact Phase 1 members in anyway even after reading these numbers.

If divided society: Does Phase 1 society care what is happening in the
next compound wall of Phase 2 society?

Just like you are proposing to have Phase 2 representation in EC,
don't you think you need phase 1 representation in your so called
phase 2 working committee?

Life is full compromises whether we like it or not. Few phase 1
members shared their opinion on continuing 'ACTIVE' EC members with an
intention of not derailing Phase 1 construction, what is wrong in
that? I do favor having elections for non-active EC positions and open
positions. You keep proposing to have elections for all positions to
see if they can win. Can't we all give few and take few? Think it
over.

Vamsee